Model comparison

Muse Spark 1.2 vs Qwen Turbo

Muse Spark 1.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.8 to 26.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 23× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Muse Spark 1.2's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Muse Spark 1.2 Meta

49.8

Rank #44 Confirmed

Qwen Turbo Alibaba (Qwen)

26.8

Rank #329 Reported

Summary

  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Muse Spark 1.2 leads 53.9 to 22.2.
  • Qwen Turbo is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $4.25 for Muse Spark 1.2.
  • Muse Spark 1.2 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

Side by side

Muse Spark 1.2 and Qwen Turbo specifications
Muse Spark 1.2Qwen Turbo
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index49.826.8
Released2026-08-052024-11-01
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1.05M1M
Max output131K16K
Input $ / M tokens$1.25$0.05
Output $ / M tokens$4.25$0.20
Results tracked283

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 48.6 (#49), Qwen Turbo: —

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen Turbo
DeepSWE54.9%—
LMArena WebDev1532—
FrontierSWE12%—
SciCode56.4%—
WeirdML60.3%—
LMArena Coding1497—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 29.5 (#77), Qwen Turbo: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen Turbo
APEX-Agents36.4%—
GDP.pdf16%—

Reasoning Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 50.4 (#32), Qwen Turbo: —

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen Turbo
SimpleBench74.5%—
NYT Connections (extended)79.2%—
CritPt17.7%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1490—
DTBench94.7%—
LMCA48.4%—
Epoch Capabilities Index155.18—

Math Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Muse Spark 1.2: 43.8 (#68), Qwen Turbo: 14.5 (#291)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen Turbo
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—6.1%
ProofBench43%—
MATH Level 5—56.2%

Knowledge Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Muse Spark 1.2: 53.9 (#49), Qwen Turbo: 22.2 (#267)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen Turbo
GPQA Diamond—41.8%
SimpleQA Verified60.3%—
LMArena Expert1485—

Multimodal Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 42.6 (#24), Qwen Turbo: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen Turbo
LMArena Vision1304—

Multilingual Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 57.4 (#10), Qwen Turbo: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen Turbo
LMArena Non-English1479—
LMArena Chinese1519—
LMArena Russian1494—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 77.1 (#30), Qwen Turbo: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen Turbo
LMArena Instruction Following1466—

Long Context Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 45.4 (#35), Qwen Turbo: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen Turbo
LMArena Longer Query1483—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 72.6 (#14), Qwen Turbo: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen Turbo
LMArena Text1486—
LMArena Creative Writing1444—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1840—
LMArena Multi-Turn1504—

Frequently asked questions

Is Muse Spark 1.2 better than Qwen Turbo?

Muse Spark 1.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.8 to 26.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 23× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Muse Spark 1.2's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Muse Spark 1.2 or Qwen Turbo?

Qwen Turbo is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; Muse Spark 1.2 lists at $1.25 and $4.25.

Which has the bigger context window?

Muse Spark 1.2 does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

How many benchmarks do Muse Spark 1.2 and Qwen Turbo share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Muse Spark 1.2 has 28 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Turbo has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper